Effect of emergency nursing intervention on the prognosis of patients with hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-9133.2016.03.014

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To investigate the effect of emergency nursing intervention on the prognosis of patients with hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage (intracerebral bemorrhage Hypertensive, HICH).

Methods

76 cases of HICH patients were selected from February 2014 to February 2015, Jiaozhou City People’s hospital treatment as the research object, randomly divided into observation group and control group two groups, 38 cases in each group, the control group adopted prehospital care, clinical observation, nursing, medication nursing, diet guidance and routine nursing, observation group take emergency care, including emergency care, monitoring of vital signs, nursing care, clinical observation and nursing of intracranial hypertension, necessary preoperative preparation and postoperative nursing of the clinical basic nursing, rehabilitation nursing and psychological nursing effects were compared between the two groups of nursing intervention on patients with NIHSS, FMA, Barthel, SF-36, SDS, SAS index the score.

Results

in the observation group, 37 cases were treated successfully, the success rate of treatment was 97.37%, the control group 32 cases were successfully treated successfully, the success rate of treatment was 84.21%, the success rate of observation group was significantly higher than that of control group (P<0.05). The observation group NIHSS score was 11.21+ 3.08, 19.23+ 3.26 in the control group, the observation group Barthel index was 78.92+ 8.65, 53.35+ 8.04 in the control group, the observation group FMA score 38.31+ 3.62, 23.68+ 3.46 in the control group, the observation group SAS score 47.41+ 5.42, 67.21+ 6.47 in the control group, the observation group SDS score was 45.09+ 4.65. The control group is 59.83+ 4.74, the patients in the observation group NIHSS (nerve function defect score, Barthel index), FMA (functional) scores were better than the control group (P<0.05), SDS (self rating Depression Scale (SAS), self rating Anxiety Scale) scores were lower than the control group (P<0.05). In addition, the observation group SF-36 quality of life scale of each dimension score higher than the control group (P<0.05).

Conclusions

HICH patients with emergency care, can effectively improve the prognosis of patients, reduce the psychological negative emotions, improve the quality of life of patients, the effect is worthy of recognition.

Key words: emergency nursing, hypertension cerebral hemorrhage, prognosis

guixin Liu, Xiujie Chen. Effect of emergency nursing intervention on the prognosis of patients with hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage[J]. Chinese Journal of Hygiene Rescue(Electronic Edition), 2016, 02(03): 186-189.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhwsyjdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-9133.2016.03.014

https://zhwsyjdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2016/V02/I03/186

Figures/Tables 3

References 10

1	王金兰，陈玉霞，彭红霞，等．临床护理路径在脑出血患者护理中的应用[J]．中国实用护理杂志，2010，26(21)：13-14.
2	李春霞，谢春雷，李爱文，等．早期活动对预防脑出血患者术后下肢深静脉血栓形成的作用[J]．中华护理杂志，2011，46(1)：37-39.
3	毛秋云，孙爱芹，宁波，等．Orem自理理论在脑出血病人术后恢复期的应用[J]．中华护理杂志，2004，39(2)：96-97.
4	Gallek M, Alexander S, Crago E, et al.Endothelin-1 and endothelin receptor gene variants and their association with negative outcomes following aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage[J]. Biol Res Nurs, 2013, 15(4): 390-397.
5	盛庆瑜．超早期显微手术治疗高血压基底节区脑出血患者的护理[J]．中国实用护理杂志，2012，28(17)：29-30.
6	Olson DM, Zomorodi M, Britz GW, et al.Continuous cerebral spinal fluid drainage associated with complications in patients admitted with subarachnoid hemorrhage[J]. J Neurosurg, 2013, 119(4): 974-980.
7	王月，秦晓伟，高志杰，等．脑出血手术患者医院感染的原因分析与护理策略[J]．中国组织工程研究，2014，(z1)：14.
8	李洁，黄艳君，闭春丽，等．黛芩化痰丸在脑出血行气管切开病人气道护理中的应用[J]．护理研究，2015，(30)：3776-3777.
9	方兰英．程序化护理在脑出血临床护理中的应用效果分析[J]．四川医学，2015，(9)：1354-1356.
10	Kim H, Crago E, Kim M, et al.Cerebral vasospasm after sub-arachnoid hemorrhage as a clinical predictor and phenotype for genetic association study[J]. Int J Strok, 2013, 8(8): 620-625.

组别	例数	NIHSS	Barthel指数	FMA
观察组	37	11.21±3.08	78.92±8.65	38.31±3.62
对照组	32	19.23±3.26	53.35±8.04	23.68±3.46
t值	?	10.498	12.650	17.086
P值	?	<0.01	<0.01	<0.01

组别	例数	NIHSS	Barthel指数	FMA
观察组	37	11.21±3.08	78.92±8.65	38.31±3.62
对照组	32	19.23±3.26	53.35±8.04	23.68±3.46
t值	?	10.498	12.650	17.086
P值	?	<0.01	<0.01	<0.01

组别	例数	SAS	SDS
观察组	37	47.41±5.42	45.09±4.65
对照组	32	67.21±6.47	59.83±4.74
t值	?	13.834	13.014
P值	?	<0.01	<0.01

组别	例数	SAS	SDS
观察组	37	47.41±5.42	45.09±4.65
对照组	32	67.21±6.47	59.83±4.74
t值	?	13.834	13.014
P值	?	<0.01	<0.01

组别	例数	躯体健康	躯体角色	躯体疼痛	精力	心理健康	情绪角色	社会功能	总体健康
观察组	37	85.43±17.21	81.12±15.33	87.12±16.64	89.91±16.12	90.85±14.42	88.61±11.21	85.89±13.12	85.56±12.24
对照组	32	68.81±13.42	63.32±12.01	76.11±16.41	79.02±15.53	80.29±16.32	81.01±12.23	76.69±12.36	75.56±13.34
t值	?	4.421	5.307	2.758	2.846	2.854	2.692	2.983	3.246
P值	?	<0.05	<0.05	<0.05	<0.05	<0.05	<0.05	<0.05	<0.05

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export